1. Field of the Invention
The device of this invention resides in the field of sound-dampeners for musical instruments and more particularly relates to a detachable mute for violins, violas and cellos for reducing the transmissive capability of the bridge.
2. History of the Prior Art
Instrument mutes have been employed for the purpose of altering an instrument's tone and volume. The volume is the level of audible tone and is commonly measured in decibels (dB). Tone is defined as the combination of frequencies produced by the musical instrument. Different instruments have distinctive tonal qualities based on a series of physical parameters including the construction of the instrument and the way it is played by the musician. A combination of tone and volume combine to create the sound palette of each musical instrument.
A musician is always seeking new means to broaden the sound palette of an instrument. A wide variety of mute designs exist to achieve the goal of altering the sound palette of the musical instrument. As a result, mute designs generally encompass two aspects important to the musician: functionality and range of use. Functionality describes the ability of the mute to achieve the desired sound palette change as well as the ease of use or skill level required by the musician to achieve the desired effect. Of special importance to the musician is his/her ability to be able to quickly move the mute in and out of muting positions during the performance of a musical passage. Range of use is the ability of the mute to create multiple sound palette changes depending on how the mute is used by the musician.
Bridge emplacement mutes function by reducing the transmissive capability of the instrument bridge. The instrument bridge is the transmissive column between the strings of the instrument and the body of the instrument. The strings of the musical instrument are bowed or plucked by the musician to produce vibrations. The vibrations are amplified by the body of the instrument.
In this case, the body of the instrument is a violin, viola or cello body and each instrument has four strings. The bridge connects the strings to the body of the instrument and is the main transmissive channel carrying the vibrations of the strings to the amplifying body of the instrument. The bridge rests between the fingerboard of the instrument and the tailpiece of the instrument. The tailpiece is the anchoring point for the instrument strings, and the fingerboard is the portion of the instrument where the musician is able to alter the vibrating lengths of the strings with his or her fingers.
The sound palette change is dependent on the placement of the mute in relation to the instrument bridge as well as the mute's shape and composition. Prior art mutes are commonly constructed from rubber, wood, leather or metal. Other less common materials include bone and plastic composites. Rubber and metal generally produce a dull tone in comparison to leather and wood. Wood and leather, however, tend to be harder to work with during the manufacturing process. Bone mutes are generally custom-made productions. Plastic mutes are beginning to compete with rubber mutes because of plastic's molding advantages during the manufacturing processes.
All mutes are currently one or two-position mutes and are designed in a first position to produce a one sound palette change and in the second position for storing. Thus they can only be used in one specific mode in relation to the bridge to affect the sound of the instrument. Furthermore, many mutes when not in use must be removed from the instrument or clumsily fastened into a resting position on the instrument, making them difficult and undesirable to use during certain passages in musical compositions. The weight of the mute may also become a factor when the mute is used for a longer period of time. Finally, the mute must produce an aesthetically pleasing sound palette change. As a result, musicians and instrument builders have long sought a means of diversifying the functionality and range of use of the mute. Frequently composers and conductors dictate when to use the mute during the performance of a musical composition. It is the responsibility of the player to implement usage of the mute at that moment that the composer/conductor so indicates without interrupting the flow of the music. Very often little regard is given as to how much time it takes to place the mute in position.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,552,255 to Kaston (1971) is a typical example of a simple two-position mute which is attached between the middle strings. The mute either can be hooked over the top of the bridge when in use and slid back between the middle strings when not in use, or can be notched onto one of the strings via a slit in the body of the mute. The disadvantage of the Kaston mute is that it is prone to falling off when not secured through the slit notch. However, this securing is difficult to accomplish in the middle of a performance, and sometimes this type of mute will rattle on the strings.
U.S. Pat. No. D126,040 to Alemany (1941) is a design patent showing a unique curved pattern adapted to a clip-on mute. The mute functions similarly to the Kaston mute. Related patents are U.S. Pat. No. 6,872,875 to Hollander (2005); U.S. Pat. No. D63,710 to Duff (1924). Similar clip-on mute utility patents include U.S. Pat. No. 2,483,268 to Fawick (1949); U.S. Pat. No. 759,375 to Istas (1904); and U.S. Pat. No. 4,449,438 to Goldner (1984). These mutes all suffer from the disadvantage of producing only one tonal variation and being difficult to manipulate during the middle of a performance.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,773,296 to Bech (1988) is a two-position mute that clips over the top of the bridge and uses the A and D strings as sliding guides. When not in use, the Bech mute employs a magnet to hold the mute in the resting position. The Bech mute provides an improved retention mechanism that reduces rattling, but it can only be employed to produce one tonal variation. Furthermore, the magnetic retention mechanism may interfere with the fine tuners installed on the tailpiece of some instruments.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,175,007 to Warner (1939) describes a two-position mute which is attached onto the top of the instrument bridge when in use and is held in the resting position against the tailpiece by a rubber band retention system. The mute only produces one tonal change, and the mute cannot be quickly removed from the instrument once installed.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,347,906 to Geiger (1994) is a cloth bag mute which is attached above the bridge onto the strummed or plucked instrument strings and must be removed from the instrument when not in use. The Geiger mute is the only mute that offers a significant range, depending on where the mute is placed on the instrument's strings and the amount of tension used to hold the bag on top of the strings. U.S. Pat. No. 1,518,935 to Kozelek (1924) uses a cloth strand member which is placed between the strings and the fingerboard when muting is desired and which is removed from the instrument when not in use. Both the Kozelek and Geiger mutes are bulky and must be removed from the instrument when not in use.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,440,917 to Lemon (1969) is an example of a fixed mute which is attached to the strings below the bridge and utilizes a clamping mechanism to attach to the top of the bridge when muting is required. U.S. Pat. No. 4,173,165 to Rhodes (1979) and U.S. Pat. No. 2,863,350 to Si-Hon Ma (1958) feature similar clamping and muting mechanisms. These mutes have a somewhat bulky retention mechanism and are only capable of creating one tonal change. Furthermore, they are difficult to install and cannot be quickly removed during a performance.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,667,560 to Jablonski (1987) is a removable mute which is attached over the top of the bridge and removed from the instrument when not in use. U.S. Pat. No. 2,475,055 to Shuh (1949) is a variant of the same muting concept. These mutes are designed as practice mutes and create only one tonal change. These mutes are also relatively heavy in comparison to other common mutes and may cause fatigue to the musician if used on the instrument for an extended period of time.
The foremost disadvantage of prior art mutes as they relate to the violin family of instruments is their ability to produce only one sound palette change. Furthermore, the palette change must be an aesthetically pleasing change reflecting a correct combination in the alteration of the tone and reduction of the volume of the instrument. Rubber and metal mutes have a reputation of creating a dull tone which is not aesthetically pleasing to many musicians. Wood and leather mutes create a generally pleasing sound. Leather mutes have the disadvantage of being very difficult to make and costly to produce and therefore costly to purchase.
A second disadvantage of prior art mutes is the skill level required by the musician to employ the mute effectively. Mutes that are easily attached or detached from the instrument are generally preferred to mutes having complex mechanics or non-intuitive mechanisms. Many prior art mutes require fixed installation, immediately excluding them from use by musicians who do not wish to permanently affix a mute to the instrument. Prior art mutes that rest between the bridge and the tailpiece are prone to rattling when the strings vibrate and have been known to fall off, both undesirable occurrences. Mutes that must be removed from the instrument when not in use are disadvantageous to musicians playing a musical composition in which there is little time allowance to engage the mute onto the bridge. Also detachable mutes are easily lost because of their small size.